The Game of Politics

Politics is like a game of cards, but much simpler. The rules are:

1. Get yourself known to the public so that your name would be recognized on the ballot. It doesn't make a difference how this is accomplished, but it helps if it not due to any type of lewd or criminal behavior - although this would not necessarily exclude your candidacy. Make sure that you get the favor of the political leadership of the party you favor since you have virtually no chance without it, and even less a chance if it is not a major party.

2. Acquire a lot of money by promising favors and buying loyalty from those who hope to gain favor in your purview of administration. If you have the favor of the party, they will help you get the money for your campaign. Otherwise, no chance.

3. Dig up as much dirt on your opponent(s) as possible. It is not a requirement that the issues be true, only that those issues would be difficult to disprove - at least until the election is over. Generalities regarding the opponent's party is always fair game.

4. Buy as much media time as you can afford (it's campaign money anyway), and slander your opponent just shy of legal trouble. Avoid making promises except in generalities as this may backfire on you. Make sure you are well dressed and looking good as this is what the public wants. What you say is of little importance.

5. If elected, you are home free to do what you want. Fiscal management is not your responsibility because it can always be blamed on someone else. Enjoy the perks and use whatever you can to your advantage. You need something, get it and put it on the government tab. You now have power and, if handled shrewdly, a somewhat unlimited source of money.

This type of campaigning has been true ever since there have been candidates vying for the same position. It was true in our government since it's inception in the late 18th century. Although, the above rules are somewhat sarcastic, they are not far from the truth. Are we naive enough to believe that every politician has our best interest in mind? I believe that even the most altruistic fall by the wayside when they realize that the only way to keep their position is to "follow the party line" regardless of what is best for the people. Choosing "the least offensive candidate" is NOT a reasonable choice. Apparently, neither is qualification.

What the people of this great country want is relative peace and prosperity. Neither word should be taken in the absolute, but rather as a state of being free of tyranny and having unjust limits placed on our freedoms. Prosperity does not imply wealth (which is an arbitrary term anyway); prosperity is the freedom to obtain a satisfying livelihood through one's own abilities. As such, it is not, nor should it ever be, the purview of ANY governmental body to limit that personal responsibility.

Governments are responsible to ensure the safety of their constituents, but not to ensure everyone's welfare. The exception would be for the assistance of those persons who are unable to maintain a viable standard of life. When government expands its purview into the private sector, or overrides it's constitutional authority, it is wrong. In a democracy, government should not dictate how people must live. That is socialism. The more control government has, the less the people have to decide what is best for their lives. That is not democracy.

Life on other planets

Any person who is minimally aware of astronomy realizes that the Earth is one of several planets within our solar system, of which the sun is a minor star of billions of others within a spiral arm of our galaxy. This galaxy is one of countless other galaxies within the viewable universe as we know it. As our technology increases, we realize that there are other planets around other stars, and speculation is that some may have life, and a few of these life forms may be intelligent. OF COURSE! Why are we so naive to believe that this minor speck in the universe is the only possible "intelligent" life?

We are not the oldest solar system - even within our own galaxy. There are life forms which have probably been around eons before us and their technology would be far beyond our own. If we had the advanced technology for interstellar travel, we would undoubtedly be studying other life forms that we would encounter in our region of stars. Even with our current technology, which is crude at best, we are beginning to realize that there is the possibility of other life forms out in space.

To realize the complexity of life forms, we merely need to look at our own planet. There are life forms that look different from us and each other based on the adaptation to their environment. Creatures that crawl, swim, fly, or even live anchored to the ground. Many shapes and sizes from microscopic to enormous; many adaptations to food sources, some symbiotic, others predatory, but all surviving in their adapted niche. Why would that only be true on planet Earth?

Since life adapts to it's environment, we should expect that the life that exists on other planets would evolve based on various critical factors. Gravity would determine whether the creatures would be thin and tall or short and stocky, the amount of light would affect the size of their eyes (probably at least two for binocular vision) and sensitivity to the spectrum to which they are used to. Thin air would require large lungs if air breathing (dependent on the gases in the atmosphere). All sorts of adaptations are possible as we see on earth. Their skin would also be determined by factors such as radiation, etc. The end result is that we should not expect that they are even carbon based or water dependent as we are. In fact, they do not need to resemble us in any way.

For many years we have been sending radio and TV signals which radiate into space. Unfortunately, most of it is inane indicating to other intelligent life that we are primitive. Assuming that many UFO sightings are in fact ET in origin, who can blame them for being curious to study our primitive, and warring, societies without making direct contact. Our first reaction would be to try to kill or capture one for study. Fortunately, they apparently do not want the same from us.

As I said earlier, we are a primitive world, and we have barely begun to understand who, and what, we are. After all it has been perhaps 100,000 years since our prototypes crawled on this earth, and merely 100 or so years since science began to scratch the surface of technology. That is an extremely minor blip in the estimated thirteen billion years that the universe has been around.

Government in America

Today I attended my first meeting of the local Tea Party group named West Suburban Patriots. I went with an open mind to see what they had to say without any preconceived ideas other than knowing that they were dissatisfied with the direction of our government. I must admit that I shared that feeling of discontent for some time, that is to say through several cycles of Presidents and Congress, regardless of political affiliation.

I found that the speakers at the meeting were not fanatics, but rather that they were very concerned and aware citizens. The speakers, and the 40 or so attendees, honestly felt that bigger government is not the answer to the problems in this country, but, in fact, serve to exacerbate issues which could be resolved in a simpler and far less costly manner.

The function of the Tea Party is neither to support nor to wrest control from either the Democrats or Republicans. It serves to bring awareness to the people that our government is bloated and excessive in it's use of power and spending.

Many of the principles of the Tea Party are founded upon the ideas of Thomas Jefferson who, although he was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence and the third President of the United States, was vigilant regarding the possibility of corruption of power by government. He even warned that "... All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."

We cannot choose to remain silent while our government takes control over our inalienable rights as citizens, regardless of the motivation or intent. Telling us that government should control health care is a dangerous precedent. It not only takes away our freedom to choose and control our own destiny, it mandates that we do what the government deems best for us. That to me smacks of socialism, and that is not what the founders of this country intended, nor is it what the citizens of this country desire for our future.

The Greater Wasteland

I am tired of the blather in all forms of media – especially the Internet – where accusations and just plain BS are put out daily.  Thanks to our Constitution we are allowed free speech which is vital to a free society.  But, as with any right, it is subject to misuse by those who have an agenda which is contrary to the truth.

No President or Congress has ever gotten it right all of the time.  The same applies to anyone or any group who has policy making authority.  To slander and accuse for the purpose of destroying the credibility of that authority is just plain wrong!  Misinformation, either due to intent or ignorance, is dangerous.  There are so many in our society that do not take the time or effort to check out sources, and in many cases that information is difficult or nearly impossible to disprove.

Our government was divided into the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial in order to provide for checks and balances.  This was to ensure that each branch is disallowed total power.  When one branch seems to get it wrong, it is not a conspiracy, but a case of many disagreeing with the decision.  If the majority of the populace disagrees with the performance of our government, then it is our responsibility as voters to fix it by electing competent persons to replace those who do not uphold our values.

When Newton Minow was chairman of the FCC, he said in a speech to the National Association of Broadcasters on May 9, 1961 that television was a “vast wasteland” based on inane programming.  That is still true today, but the Internet is even a greater wasteland of stupidity and ignorance.

Gangs ... not guns!

In the city of Chicago, there are multiple murders almost every night.  Many of those killed or maimed are children and young adults.  Based on the locations within Chicago and ethnicity of the murders, it is very likely attributed to gangs and gang wars.  Mayor Daley and the Chicago politicians have chosen to ignore the gang crime and instead concentrate on a gun ban.  The problem is not the guns, Mayor, it is the gangs!  Whether or not the possession of a gun is legal or not is of no consequence to the gang members.  Legislating gun ownership only affects the citizen who wants to protect him/herself and their family. 

Then there is the issue of the legal system in Chicago, or the lack thereof.  When a person has a criminal background especially when violent or reckless behavior is a pattern, they should be doing jail time and not walking out of court with a mild reprimand.  The recent cop killer had shown repetitive criminal behavior and yet was allowed to walk the streets looking for another victim.

 Mayor Daley, stop hassling the general public who want to defend themselves, and take decisive action against the gangs before more innocent children have to die.